Latest News and Comment from Education

Thursday, May 14, 2015

Jersey Jazzman: Charter School Propaganda: A Case Study, Part II

Jersey Jazzman: Charter School Propaganda: A Case Study, Part II:

Charter School Propaganda: A Case Study, Part II





All this week, I've been debunking the Star-Ledger's big, fat, wet kiss to TEAM Academy Charter School, the Newark branch of the national charter chain KIPP.


First, I showed how the author of this piece, Julie O'Connor, displayed what can only be described as willing ignorance about how "successful" charter schools get the gains that they do. Bruce Baker and I patiently (OK, not always patiently...) explained to O'connor the realities of charter school demographics, funding and outcomes -- but O'Connor either wouldn't or couldn't understand.

Next, I showed how there are dozens of schools -- both public and charter -- that, by O'Connor's own criteria, should also be considered "jewels." Yet O'Connor and her boss, Tom Moran, have shown no interest in any of them. Maybe because those schools don't have full-time communications directors, like TEAM/KIPP does, who can spoon feed newspaper op-ed writers the masticated pablum they crave.

I then explained how the "facts" TEAM/KIPP obviously fed O'Connor are, at best, completely lacking in context and, at worst, are just flat-out wrong. Because O'Connor clearly didn't do any of her own research, she simply accepted TEAM/KIPP's spin as gospel truth, never challenging herself to think critically about what she was being told.

I don't want to beat this to death. But I also don't want a few other assertions in this piece to go unchallenged:

- One single study does not make or break an argument -- especially if that study is irrelevantIn her piece, O'Connor cites a study by the research group, Mathematica:
Traditionalists also don't like the idea of breaking off from the main public school system. They argue KIPP's success is too good to be true, a product of statistical quirks that can't be replicated with an entire district of students. 

But these critics seemed blinded by ideology, a misplaced loyalty to educational tradition. Mathematica, a respected non-partisan research institute, studied KIPP schools nationally and found they did better than traditional schools, even with similarly disadvantaged kids. 
When readers pushed back in the comments section at nj.com, O'Connor repeatedly cited this study as evidence of TEAM/KIPP's sparkle:

@Joseph Addison Repeating my comment on attrition below, in case you missed it: Here's how KIPP responds to the criticism that it has higher student attrition for black males: http://blog.kippnj.org/attrition. The national Mathematica study, by a nonpartisan institute, matched at the student level to control for demographics and also looked at student attrition. http://educationnext.org/student-attrition-explain-kipps-success/
@NJParents1 You're right that all charters aren't better than district schools - some are worse. It really depends on the charter. Here's how KIPP responds to the criticism that it has higher student attrition for black males: http://blog.kippnj.org/attrition. The national Mathematica study, by a nonpartisan institute, matched at the student level to control for demographics and also looked at student attrition. http://educationnext.org/student-attrition-explain-kipps-success/

@JuliaSassRubin I understand your position, Julia. But the two schools most
- See more at: http://jerseyjazzman.blogspot.com/2015/05/charter-school-propaganda-case-study_14.html#sthash.9QiY5CG1.dpuf

Train Wrecks and Teachers: victims of greed and corruption | Reclaim Reform

Train Wrecks and Teachers: victims of greed and corruption | Reclaim Reform:



Train Wrecks and Teachers: victims of greed and corruption

How is the Amtrak derailment in Philadelphia related to the financial disaster in Illinois that is being blamed on active and retired teachers along with other public employees?
Both are legislatively created disasters which have horrific potential consequences for all involved. This is no exaggeration.
The inexpensive, low-tech requirement called positive train control is already used worldwide. There is no doubt that positive train control could have prevented the train wreck and the accompanying deaths and crippling injuries. Human error or no human error, probably no accident would have occurred. This specific safety regulation was required for America’s trains this year in spite of the fact that train industry lobbyists and political donors had already watered down the regulations concerning the scope of this public safety requirement.
The bill’s main sponsor, Senator Roy Blunt (R) of Missouri, received nearly $300,000 from the railroad industry. One senator in one key position.
The Obama “administration” as part of a court proceeding in 2011 had already successfully limited the scope of the financial costs the train industry would have to pay for the simple safety feature of positive train control. But when corporate masters want all the money they can grab immediately, well…
A relatively few dollars were spent on politicians and their employees to assure the train industry short term big bucks for industry execs and their cronies. To hell with the risks and consequences for all other human beings.
DemrocracyNow and David Sirota
In Illinois the ex-Gov. Pat Quinn (D) and both supermajority (D) legislative bodies signed a pension cutting bill; according to them, teacher pensions caused the financial ruin of the state. Those greedy teachers expected the pension debts to be paid by the state as legally contracted. Politicos insteadpaid huge amounts to incentivize their donors. (There actually is no crisis except for the propaganda that claims there is. Even Senate President Cullerton admits that no actual pension crisis exists.) Present Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) wants even greater pension theft to occur. The bill would have stolen wages from active teachers and other public Train Wrecks and Teachers: victims of greed and corruption | Reclaim Reform:

OMG HERE WE GO AGAIN: City employee files sexual harassment complaint against Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson | The Sacramento Bee

City employee files sexual harassment complaint against Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson | The Sacramento Bee:

City employee files sexual harassment complaint against Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson






A former aide in the Sacramento city manager’s office filed a claim last month against Mayor Kevin Johnson alleging the mayor sexually harassed her multiple times over a seven-month period at City Hall, according to a copy of the claim obtained by The Sacramento Bee.
The employee – identified in the claim as Estrellita Ilee Muller, 32 – alleged that she was summoned to the mayor’s private library at City Hall by Johnson’s security officer and that the mayor pressed his body against her, felt her torso and tried to kiss her. Muller filed the claim with the City Clerk’s office in April and is seeking $200,000 in damages, according to the document. She also filed a formal discrimination complaint with the city’s human resources director in October 2014 – a complaint that was found insufficient by that office.
Etan Rosen, an attorney representing Muller, initially told The Bee he would not comment because the case was “ongoing.” But Thursday afternoon, the mayor’s office issued a statement on behalf of Muller’s attorney, Etan Rosen, saying “my client is satisfied with the conclusion of this matter.”
When contacted by The Bee to verify that he made the comment, Rosen replied, “What did it say?” He then confirmed that his client was “satisfied with the process” and that she would not seek a civil lawsuit against Johnson.
Johnson issued a statement shortly after 2 p.m. saying the “incident described in the complaint simply never happened. Ever.”
“After a complete and thorough investigation, the city has concluded not once – but twice – that the allegations are unsubstantiated,” he said.
Muller was an executive assistant to City Manager John Shirey before moving to the city’s human resources department in October. She did not return a phone message seeking comment.
According to the claim filed last month with the clerk’s office, Muller was summoned to the mayoral library on the fifth floor of City Hall by one of Johnson’s security officers on Dec. 26, 2013. Johnson closed the door when he and Muller entered the library and gave her “an unwelcome and close hug, pressing his body against claimant, then felt her along her torso,” according to the claim.
“(The mayor) pressed his body against hers and asked her if she ‘felt it.’ He then attempted to kiss claimant. Claimant was forced to push herself away,” the claim states.
Johnson then allegedly told Muller he “had a thing for her” for four years, according to the claim. Muller told Johnson she was married and the mayor “proposed that claimant enter into a sexual relationship with him, asking claimant if she was ‘game.’”
Muller declined, according to the claim. Johnson “persisted” and told her not to answer immediately. He said he would walk by her desk in the city manager’s office and told her “if the answer was ‘yes’ claimant was to give him a thumbs up and if the answer was ‘no,’ a thumbs down.”
The claim states that Muller’s supervisors at City Hall “failed to take appropriate action to protect” her from the alleged incident or “subsequent incidents of harassment.” The claim states Muller told “several representatives of the city regarding the conduct of Mr. Johnson on several separate occasions” and that those representatives “offered no helpful advice and took no action in response to receiving the information.”
“Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that Mr. Johnson had acted inappropriately with respect to other city employees and representatives in the past and that representatives of the city knew, or had reason to know, of facts establishing this,” the claim states. “Notwithstanding this, city representatives did nothing to effectively deal with the situation or to protect plaintiff and similarly situated employees.”
According to the claim, “the harassment continued.”
In July 2014, Johnson told Muller, “Hey lady…you are avoiding me,” according to the claim.
On Aug. 1, 2014, Johnson approached Muller at her desk and held her hands, according to the claim. The mayor “then manipulated her hands so her thumbs would go up and then down and said that he wanted to see if her thumbs worked saying ‘some people’s thumbs are funny.’ Claimant told Mr. Johnson that her thumbs worked fine but that they would never go up,” according to the claim.
The claim states that Muller told her superiors of each interaction.
Muller notified City Attorney James Sanchez of her allegations on Sept. 24, 2014, according to the claim. Sanchez “sent her the city’s internal discrimination complaint resolution guide and sexual harassment policy.” A week later, Muller “was required to attend a meeting with Mr. Johnson, during which time he made a point of establishing eye contact with her,” the claim states.
Muller accepted a job with the city’s human resources department in October 2014 “to more successfully avoid” the mayor, according to her claim. The claim also states she turned down a higher-paying job in the city “because she did not feel comfortable working in proximity to Mr. Johnson.”
Muller filed her formal discrimination complaint with the city’s human resources department on Oct. 10, 2014. Human Resources Manager Kenneth Fleming investigated the complaint, according to Muller’s claim.
Fleming later told Muller “he had never lost a case in his career with the city and implied that if his investigation resulted in a negative finding claimant would not have a chance of prevailing in her case. He never informed claimant that she was required to file a claim with the city to preserve her right to proceed in this matter. He treated claimant like the aggressor not the victim,” according to the claim.
The claim said Muller felt “attacked” and “cried uncontrollably” at a Dec. 22 meeting with Fleming. She was notified on Jan. 7 that her discrimination complaint had been denied.
Johnson’s name has surfaced as the focus of other sexually-related allegations in the past.
In 1997, Johnson signed a draft confidential settlement with a Phoenix teenager who had claimed the former NBA player molested her, according to a copy of the document obtained by The Bee in 2008. The agreement amount was $230,000, according to the document.
The settlement stemmed from a 1996 investigation by Phoenix police into an allegation that Johnson, who was 29 at the time, disrobed in the presence of a 16-year-old girl and touched her inappropriately. The allegations were made to police by the girl’s therapist.
Johnson denied the allegations and no criminal charges were filed in the case.
In 2008, soon after Johnson launched his first mayoral campaign, a police report filed by a former teacher from Sacramento High School surfaced alleging that a 17-year-old student at the school told the teacher Johnson had approached her from behind, massaged her shoulders and touched her breasts.
Sacramento police later said the girl recanted her story and found the allegation to be unfounded.
Johnson founded the nonprofit St. HOPE organization that operates Sacramento High School as a charter school.
A separate allegation made in teacher Erik Jones’ report charged that Johnson tried to get into bed with a volunteer from the Hood Corps program, an urban volunteer program that was part of St. Hope. Police did not investigate that allegation because the young woman was not a minor.
 City employee files sexual harassment complaint against Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson | The Sacramento Bee:

solidaridad: Schools Los Angeles Students Deserve (SLASD) May General Assembly

solidaridad: Schools Los Angeles Students Deserve (SLASD) May General Assembly:



Schools Los Angeles Students Deserve (SLASD) May General Assembly

Schools Los Angeles Students Deserve (SLASD)
Schools Los Angeles Students Deserve (SLASD) General Assembly

Thursday, May 21, 2015
4:30-6:30PM
St. Marks Lutheran Church
3651 South Vermont Ave,
Los Angeles, CA 90007

(2 blocks north of the Expo line's Vermont station)

Final General Assembly of the school year. This year we have accomplished so much!

  1. Parent Leadership Institutes provided space for parents from across the city to strategize about how to make changes in their children's schools
  2. SLASD-GC parents exposed conditions at schools across LAUSD through participating in UTLA's Parent Caravan
  3. In multi-day Youth Leadership Institutes, students discussed systemic oppression and resistance and built cross-school strategies
  4. Students developed a social media campaign to spread awareness of issues at their schools
  5. On their campuses, students took action to educate their peers about the Black Lives Matter movement 
  6. Students gathered over 1,200 petitions to demand changes in their schools and delivered these to the School Board
  7. We supported the fight for Ethnic Studies, and urged the School Board to fund new teaching positions to cover these new courses
  8. Parents and students spoke at rallies across the city in support of the campaign for the Schools LA Students Deserve
  9. In meetings with School Board members Zimmer, Kayser, and McKenna, we moved towards a School Board resolution
  10. Overall, our campaign created more pressure on LAUSD to sign a good contract with UTLA!
At our General Assembly, we'll be assessing our work this year, and planning for our work over the Summer and next Fall to hit the ground running!

Please join us!


Schools Matter: Guest Post: Citizen Jack responds to LA Weekly's fluffing Ref Rodriguez

Schools Matter: Guest Post: Citizen Jack responds to LA Weekly's fluffing Ref Rodriguez:



Guest Post: Citizen Jack responds to LA Weekly's fluffing Ref Rodriguez

“That’s not exactly investigative reporting or a critique of the powerful. But it represents the kind of contrarian, screw-you mentality that fits the New Times worldview now evident at the LA Weekly.” — Professor Jon Wiener

Citizen Jack responds to LA Weekly's fluffing Ref Rodriguez
"Jack," a frequent commenter on Professor Diane Ravitch's site, sent me the following critique of Joshua Emerson Smith fluff-job of charter school profiteer Refugio "Ref" Rodriguez. The fact-free ham-fisted Smith piece appeared in that trashy porn and masseuse ad pennysaver known as the LA Weekly (aka Weakly)—a bastion of Jill Stewart's brand of Ayn Rand Libertarianism.


CITIZEN JACK's OPEN LETTER TO THE AUTHOR OF THE L.A. WEEKLY ARTICLE ABOUT REF RODRIGUEZ



To Joshua Emerson Smith, (the author of the above L.A. WEEKLY article):
As with someone else who just posted, I'm also utterly shocked that you didn't mention the troubling and shocking revelations about Ref Rodriguez that emerged from a recent state audit---the same audit that Ref's ally Monica Garcia pulled out all the stops to keep sealed, but ultimately failed to do so.  (See the video of Monica and Ref standing side-by-side at last year's California Charter School Association shindig---this video is posted elsewhere in the COMMENTS section.)
Seriously, dude, writing an article about the Kayser / Rodriguez 2015 election, and not mentioning "Food-gate" even once is akin to... oh, I dunno... 
... writing about the 2004 Presidential election and not mentioning Bush's ill-advised invasion of Iraq, and most importantly, the fact that no WMD's were found... therefore the entire justification for taking us into that war was all a  manufactured hoax...

... writing about the 2010 Brown / Whitman gubernatorial election, and not mentioning "Maid-gate"...

What's up with that?  

To get you (and others) up to speed, here's a recap:

In a May 2nd Los Angeles Times' article, reporters Zahira Torres and Howard Blume detailed the troubling corruption and outrageous malfeasance that a state audit uncovered operating within Ref Rodriguez' charter school organization, "Partnership to Uplift Communities"(PUC).  Mr. Rodriguez founded this charter chain, and currently serves as its PUC's CEO and Treasurer.
Check it out here: 
or here, ( if, like me, you're too cheap to subscribe to the Times on-line site;-) ) : 


Employing a wealth of documentation, the state auditors cite systemic wrongdoing and illegal misuse of taxpayer funds on the part of PUC’s Director of Business and Development, Ms. Jacqueline Duvivier Castillo, and by extension, on the part of Founder / CEO, Mr. Rodriguez, and Jacqueline Elliot, PUC's other Chief Executive.  

After all, Ms. Castillo---it should be noted---was hired by Mr. Rodriguez and Ms. Elliott, and works under their direction.  As such, Mr. Rodriguez and Ms. Elliot bear ultimate responsibility, and gave ultimate approval to the problematic purchases and decisions that that both the state audit condemned, and that the May 2 Times' article exposed to the public.
 
And exactly what did Ref & Co. at PUC perpetrate? 

Ms. Castillo willfully chose to misuse her position to award PUC's multi-year, multi-million-dollar food contract to "Better 4 You Meals", a company that, to quote the audit, is "one hundred percent owned" by Ms. Castillo (!!!).  In the process, she enriched both herself and her husband Fernando---a top executive in that company, "Better 4 You Meals."  

While the charter school laws technically require Ref to run PUC as a "non-profit", so as to prevent such profiteering by charter officials, Ms. Castillo (and perhaps Ref?) evaded this by contracting out their food service to a for-profit company that she and her husband own.   (This is a common shabby practice within the charter industry... by the time such shenanigans are uncovered, that taxpayer money that these crooks pocket is gone, baby, gone... never to be recovered... as is the case with Ref's / PUC's "Foodgate" imbroglio.)

Again, this is all detailed to the state audit report, quoted and reported on by the reporters in the Times' article.

The Times' article further states:

--------------------------------------------
"The state Department of Education, which released emails and documents about its investigation to the Los Angeles Times under the California Public Records Act, also found:

" --- Duvivier Castillo failed to properly report her financial interests in the company

" --- The company was ineligible for the food contracts because it lacked a health permit and relied on a subcontractor to prepare meals.

" --- PUC Schools did not select the lowest-priced bidder as required."
-------------------------------------------

So, in addition to the gross impropriety of the process itself, and to the heinous misuse of the taxpayer money that funds charter schools like the PUC chain, Ms. Castillo's company, "Better 4 You Meals", operates in a substandard fashion, and thus delivered a demonstrably substandard product, as the food preparation, delivery, storage, etc. "lacked the required health permit."



Since Mr. Rodriguez hired Ms. Castillo to work at PUC, he almost certainly knew of her business holdings and interests---i.e. her and her husband's ownership of "Better 4 You Meals." 
Might Mr. Rodriguez have profited from any secret kickback from Ms. Castillo in exchange for approving the "Better 4 You Meals" contract?  Perhaps.  We do not know.  If the answer is "No" and he knew that Ms. Castillo owned "Better 4 You Meals", then why did he approve a multi-year, multi-million dollar contract for this same company ?  To quote "THE SOPRANOS", do you really think that Ref (or Ms. Elliot) didn't "get a taste" of this?  If not, what was in it for him to do so?

Furthermore, even if you assume that Mr. Rodriguez is criminally "innocent", and really did NOT know of Ms. Castillo's conflict of interest, then, at the very least, Mr. Rodriguez most certainly SHOULD have.   That's a key part of his freakin' job, for God's sake!!!  His failure to know this, and his failure to do the due diligence necessary to discover it, and to remain aware of this when making relevant decisions reflects poorly on his abilities as an administrator.  He also should have asked and required that Ms. Castillo produced the required health permit.  At the very least, Ref is most certainly "guilty" of gross administrative incompetence and negligence.   All of this renders Ref unfit to manage LAUSD's $7-billion-dollar budget. 

To date, Mr. Rodriguez himself has refused to comment on this scandal---hoping to just lay low until the election is over, as he squeaks through to an ill-gotten victory.  Such silence on his part speaks volumes.

To paraphrase Harry Truman, "the buck should stop" with Mr. Rodriguez, as he is PUC's Founder, CEO, and Treasurer.  
Bennett Kayser's constituents (like me) can tell you that "the buck" most certainly DOES stop with Bennett, as evidenced by his diligent responsiveness to their concerns (i.e. his opposition to the I-pad purchase and resulting debacle.)  
The students, parents, and citizens of LAUSD District 5 can ill afford to have someone like Mr. Rodriguez to be one of only seven individuals (the seven Board Members) in charge of LAUSD finances, a solemn responsibility that Board Member Kayser---a 30-year teacher and school administrator, by the way---has approached with the utmost care and seriousness.  

In the last four years---and in contrast to Ref's record---neither Kayser nor anyone on his staff, nor anyone connected to him in any way has benefited financially from any action that Board Member Kayser has taken.  Nor has anyone been involved in any corruption of any kind while he has been fulfilling the oath that he took in July 2011.  Profiting or enriching himself is most certainly NOT why Bennett is serving on the board.  Just as in his teaching and school administrator career, it's not about him;  it's about the well-being of 670,000 students, their parents and the community as a whole for which he is responsible.  
Unlike Rodriguez and others, it's not a fear of being caught that drives Board Member Kayser to avoid financial impropriety, eschew personal enrichment, and remain on the "straight and narrow";  it's Bennett's own conscience and moral code.  I can vouch for this, as I've known him personally for years.  That's all part of the solemn vow that an LAUSD Board Member takes when he is sworn into office.  If re-elected, Bennett's track record on this score, of course, will continue for the next four years, and for as long as Bennett serves as a public servant. 
Mr. Rodriguez' actions, as detailed in the May 2 Los Angeles Times' article, call into serious question his own ability to do likewise.

Indeed, a key part of Bennett's job as the incumbent District 5 Board Member these last four years on LAUSD's board has been to manage LAUSD's budget, and know in as great detail as possible where every penny of that $7 billion goes.  This truly is a task on a par with memorizing the phonebook, but it is a job that a School Board member must be willing and able to take on. Bennett has overseen and balanced three consecutive budgets of $7 billion each, and one that services 670,000 students and the adult staff that serve them!!! Top that, will you?
How does Ref's track record compare to this?
Well, according to writer and activist Robert Skeels, "Ref Rodriguez couldn’t keep one school, with only 100 students, balanced for nine years (9) straight! This 'insolvent' bad apple is Lakeview Charter, part of the Rodriguez/PUC charter chain. Ham-handed attempts by Rodriguez’s supporter to hide the Office of the Inspector General’s (OIG) audit of the Rodriguez-run PUC Lakeview Charter School, and affiliated enterprises, have been exposed."  

Read more of Robert Skeels' article at:

Again, the state audit's report clearly calls into question Mr. Rodriguez' capabilities in this area.  

Once the audit hit the news, Ms. Castillo quickly left PUC, with PUC executive Ms. Elliot making the only public comment on the matter... stating that they didn't know about the conflict of interest, and that there was no wrongdoing on anyone's part.

What about Ref's response? So far, incredibly, there's been RADIO SILENCE FROM REF RODRIGUEZ HIMSELF.  I am sorry, but the Mr. Rodriguez and the folks at PUC cannot have it both ways.  They cannot, on the one hand, fire Ms. Duvivier Castillo (or pressure her to resign), and then, on the other hand, claim---as Ms. Elliot has---that there was no wrong-doing on her or anyone else's part.  
If Ms. Castillo--and by extension, Ref and Ms. Elliot--- truly did nothing wrong, as PUC officials claim, there is no reason for Ms. Castillo to leave PUC, and no reason for Ref to clam up about the whole sordid affair.
Innocent people do not run away (like Ms. Castillo has);  guilty people do.
Innocent people don't clam up (like Ref has); they speak out and clear their name.

If you've got nothing to hide, you hide nothing.

VOTE FOR BENNETT KAYSER ON MAY 19TH for the DISTRICT 5 LAUSD BOARD DISTRICT SEAT





Country research and advocacy on the impact of privatisation in education | Global Initiative

Country research and advocacy on the impact of privatisation in education | Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Country research and advocacy on the impact of privatisation in education |:
Country research and advocacy on the impact of privatisation in education


Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Rotating Header Image

The GI-ESCR is currently involved in conducting innovative multi-country research and advocacy on the impact of privatisation in education on the right to education in 9 countries. The research critically examines the global development of privatisation in the light of human rights standards.
For more information on the project and its implementation, check the community group http://privatisationeducationhumanright.ning.com/

Context and history of the research

The GI-ESCR in partnership with partners undertook a research and advocacy project on the topic of privatisation in education and its impact on the right to education in Morocco. The project involved field research and preparation and presentation of Parallel NGO Reports to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) for its review of Morocco in September 2014.
Following the advocacy conducted with the CRC and with other right to education experts engaged in human rights procedures in Geneva in the context of this work on Morocco, there has been a growing awareness and interest in the topic. In particular, the secretariat and members of UN human rights treaty bodies are showing increasing interest in knowing more about the links between privatisation in education and the right to education. In the meantime, organisations such as the Global Campaign for Education, the Privatisation in Education Research Initiative, and regional and national education coalitions have been conducting research and advocacy projects on privatisation, creating a solid body of research and advocacy material.
Building on this, the GI-ESCR has engaged in conducting advocacy on privatisation in education and human rights. From 11th to 14th June 2014, the GI-ESCR organised with partners a workshop to plan future advocacy on privatisation using the human rights framework. As part of this event, the GI-ESCR also organised a side-event at the Human Rights Council on 12th June 2014 (see also the Right to Education’s summary).

The current work

Following this event, the GI-ESCR has started working with a number of partners since August 2014 on a multi-country research and advocacy project,. This project builds on the work conducted in Morocco so as to reproduce it in additional countries. The project is coordinated by PERI, and is run in collaboration with theRight to Education Project, and a number of national partners. It involves to produce research, UN parallel reports, and advocacy, in the following 9 countries, which cover a range of issues and geographical locations:
In each country, we produce with our partners parallel reports to relevant UN or regional human rights bodies. The aim is double: 1/ to do research, mobilisation and advocacy to raise awareness about the impact of privatisation in education at the national level, and 2/ to develop a set of standards and jurisprudence at the international level to clarify States’ obligations with regards to privatisation in education. The Right to Education Project will work in particular on developing international standards, and produce a methodology to support organisations to conduct research and advocacy on privatisation in education, based on the experience accumulated during the project.
We also work closely with a number of other partners, including the Global Campaign for EducationEducation International, regional education coalitions, and various other partners working on the impact in terms of social justice of privatisation in education. Another key aim of the project is to build a dynamic network of organisation working on the privatisation, and it is open to everyone. If you’re interested and you’d like to join the group of organisations, or if you’d like to have more information, please email sylvain@globalinitiative-escr.org

See also more information about our work addressing international support to privatisation in education.



Project update and progress

News updates


Summary factsheets on privatisation and human rights by country